With what the demo shown, what do you see the player do exactly when transitioning into each screen? His flying through them, not exactly exploring what's on the other side of the mountain or city building. It looked more like a interactive gameplay cutscene where we see him traveling to a pirate level. When we see Ratchet and Clank actually explore the levels to a greater extent rather than him just Star Fox his way through, than ill be raising my eye brows. 

Also next gen memory is interesting. I am going to assume you are referring to the Ram memory. If you are than keep this in mind. the XSX has 10gigs of faster Ram and 6 gigs slower than the PS5.. now also remember not all 16 gigs of Ram will be used in games. Expect next gen games to use around 8gigs to 12gigs while the rest of the Ram remains for the OS etc. So the XSX actually has more faster ram utilised for games than the PS5 since XSX's 10gigs is most likely the Ram usage of the next gen games while they might add another 2gigs from the pool if they need to hit 12. PS5's Ram wont catch up to the XSX 10gig Ram pool, maybe if all 16gigs of Ram might be utilised for games than the PS5 might average out but I highly doubt games will utilised 16gigs unless they have there own Ram pool for system memory separately. Also keep in mind the XSX also has faster bandwidth. Both systems are impressive but the edge in quality looks more like comparing high settings to Ultra settings. Some effects might look identical while Ultra will offer slightly better everything else. 

Correct me if i am wrong here. From what I am hearing, is that the XSX is RT Accelerated where as the PS5 is hardware based. From my knowledge if its hardware accelerated.. doesn't it mean the GPU doesn't have to work as hard to implement the effect where as Hardware based requires a lot more resounces from the GPU to render. If thats true than wont that would be a massive GPU gain for the XSX since RT is one of, if not the most demanding effect out there.

I believe both Consoles will have similar RT cores however would it make any difference when it comes to Hardware or accelerated base RT?

With what the demo shown, what do you see the player do exactly when transitioning into each screen? His flying through them, not exactly exploring what's on the other side of the mountain or city building. It looked more like a interactive gameplay cutscene where we see him traveling to a pirate level. When we see Ratchet and Clank actually explore the levels to a greater extent rather than him just Star Fox his way through, than ill be raising my eye brows. 

So it is just that your feeling, great. Because we have see he fighting in several different areas with different things happening.

Also next gen memory is interesting. I am going to assume you are referring to the Ram memory. If you are than keep this in mind. the XSX has 10gigs of faster Ram and 6 gigs slower than the PS5.. now also remember not all 16 gigs of Ram will be used in games. Expect next gen games to use around 8gigs to 12gigs while the rest of the Ram remains for the OS etc. So the XSX actually has more faster ram utilised for games than the PS5 since XSX's 10gigs is most likely the Ram usage of the next gen games while they might add another 2gigs from the pool if they need to hit 12. PS5's Ram wont catch up to the XSX 10gig Ram pool, maybe if all 16gigs of Ram might be utilised for games than the PS5 might average out but I highly doubt games will utilised 16gigs unless they have there own Ram pool for system memory separately. Also keep in mind the XSX also has faster bandwidth. Both systems are impressive but the edge in quality looks more like comparing high settings to Ultra settings. Some effects might look identical while Ultra will offer slightly better everything else. 

You are quite wrong here, MS already put some presentation that OS will reserve 2Gb of RAM. So you'll have 4Gb of lower RAM and 10Gb of faster RAM used by XSX on gaming, which shouldn't be a problem since not everything in the RAM need to be swapped/filled/etc at the same speed. The slightly faster RAM on the XSX matches the slightly faster GPU, but you just jumped through the problem of slower SSD and not enough bandwidht to have everything better than PS5 (which by the way contradicts what most analysts, game devs and whatnot say). Again it is expected that XSX have more pixels rendered natively at a more stable/higher framerate while PS5 load faster and have better textures. Lightning is still unknow due to RT portion being not fully disclosed yet. Geometry is also a point of contention, XSX GPU could process more, but PS5 can feed more.

Correct me if i am wrong here. From what I am hearing, is that the XSX is RT Accelerated where as the PS5 is hardware based. From my knowledge if its hardware accelerated.. doesn't it mean the GPU doesn't have to work as hard to implement the effect where as Hardware based requires a lot more resounces from the GPU to render. If thats true than wont that would be a massive GPU gain for the XSX since RT is one of, if not the most demanding effect out there.

I believe both Consoles will have similar RT cores however would it make any difference when it comes to Hardware or accelerated base RT?

I think theres some confusion. RT accelerated or hardware accelerated? I think you are refering to the same thing. Hardware accelerated means that It has specific dedicated units to do certain task, in this case is the RT cores. Might not be how AMD calls it but Nvidia calls them RT cores. Both consoles are confirmed to have dedicated units for raytracing so they wont fully rely on the compute as much.

Now the ram is tricky cuz games tend to split available ram for games. like current gen, if they had 4gb free, they would use 2gb for what you are seing and interacting while the other 2 was meant for reserve so when a change hapened you jump to it then erase what is not in use and load new data while using the otheer 2gb. Thats where SSD's come in. Now that data transfer is gona be much faster so if the new consoles have 12gb available, they dont need to use 6gb and have 6gb for preloaded assets. And then comes in sony with its solution wich they claim is so much faster that they dont need any reserve ram as they can stream anything as needed. While we dont have anything confirmed and we can go with it and say its gona happen but the xbox canot do it, then sony could be using a full 12gb for the game and ms could be using  less maybe 6-8gb just to say a number as nothing is concrete yet. 

I am only going with what's stated in the marketing. Xbox claims Hardware Accelerated while Sony claims Hardware-Based. As seen Below.

Maybe Sony has figured out a solution but lets remember that the PS5 is only twice as fast as the XSX, its not 10x faster making it impossible for the PS5 to do things the XSX cannot do. Also games will be made with Ram limitations in mind so expect next gen games to be designed around 8 to 10gigs of Ram. Sure maybe Sony can use more resources however its going to be 1st party techniques and paid exclusives. We all know that when it comes to 1st party games, all platform holders have great looking 1st party games and will make no difference to the end user because 1st party games don't appear on rival platforms making comparisons impossible.

I am only going with what's stated in the marketing. Xbox claims Hardware Accelerated while Sony claims Hardware-Based. As seen Below.

Maybe Sony has figured out a solution but lets remember that the PS5 is only twice as fast as the XSX, its not 10x faster making it impossible for the PS5 to do things the XSX cannot do. Also games will be made with Ram limitations in mind so expect next gen games to be designed around 8 to 10gigs of Ram. Sure maybe Sony can use more resources however its going to be 1st party techniques and paid exclusives. We all know that when it comes to 1st party games, all platform holders have great looking 1st party games and will make no difference to the end user because 1st party games don't appear on rival platforms making comparisons impossible.

Have we seen Ratchet fighting in those screen transitions? All I saw was him flying through the worlds like it was on rails. If I saw the player stop in between the sequences and explore a little and than jumped back into the rift and to another world without loading than I will be very impressed. That was not shown, all we saw was a player Star Foxing his way to the end without stopping or exploring making it feel to me that it was more a image than a world. I can most likely be wrong here and maybe the freedom is there, I am just not gullible and I need to see it to believe it. 

I am not a tech head and will happily admit I am wrong if someone corrects me but lets give this ago. Its not only the Ram and GPU the XSX has over the PS5. It also has a CPU advantage and a bandwidth advantage. Remember the PS5 throttles its performance between CPU usage and GPU usage meaning we are not going to see both pieces of hardware running at there full potential without one frequency being dropped lower for the other. XSX does not need to throttle between frequencies and it will run as intended for all games regardless of the demand of the game which is already based higher than the PS5.

PS5 does have an SSD advantage however the SSD does not increase the quality of the pixels on screen, it means it will load faster and draw up faster and possible be able to place more objects on screen if we get to the point that 10gigs for gaming isn't enough to work with on already fast SSDs. I am not sure how the PS5 will deliver better textures than the XSX by having a faster SSD.. unless you mean it will draw up the textures quicker so we don't get the washed out texture load ins like we see in many high demanding games this gen. That's were I believe the SSDs do have the advantage but since the XSX is also using a top notch SSD as well, I don't believe we will see these issues on that machine or on decent PC SSDs either.

I am only going with what's stated in the marketing. Xbox claims Hardware Accelerated while Sony claims Hardware-Based. As seen Below.

Maybe Sony has figured out a solution but lets remember that the PS5 is only twice as fast as the XSX, its not 10x faster making it impossible for the PS5 to do things the XSX cannot do. Also games will be made with Ram limitations in mind so expect next gen games to be designed around 8 to 10gigs of Ram. Sure maybe Sony can use more resources however its going to be 1st party techniques and paid exclusives. We all know that when it comes to 1st party games, all platform holders have great looking 1st party games and will make no difference to the end user because 1st party games don't appear on rival platforms making comparisons impossible.

Have we seen Ratchet fighting in those screen transitions? All I saw was him flying through the worlds like it was on rails. If I saw the player stop in between the sequences and explore a little and than jumped back into the rift and to another world without loading than I will be very impressed. That was not shown, all we saw was a player Star Foxing his way to the end without stopping or exploring making it feel to me that it was more a image than a world. I can most likely be wrong here and maybe the freedom is there, I am just not gullible and I need to see it to believe it. 

I am not a tech head and will happily admit I am wrong if someone corrects me but lets give this ago. Its not only the Ram and GPU the XSX has over the PS5. It also has a CPU advantage and a bandwidth advantage. Remember the PS5 throttles its performance between CPU usage and GPU usage meaning we are not going to see both pieces of hardware running at there full potential without one frequency being dropped lower for the other. XSX does not need to throttle between frequencies and it will run as intended for all games regardless of the demand of the game which is already based higher than the PS5.

PS5 does have an SSD advantage however the SSD does not increase the quality of the pixels on screen, it means it will load faster and draw up faster and possible be able to place more objects on screen if we get to the point that 10gigs for gaming isn't enough to work with on already fast SSDs. I am not sure how the PS5 will deliver better textures than the XSX by having a faster SSD.. unless you mean it will draw up the textures quicker so we don't get the washed out texture load ins like we see in many high demanding games this gen. That's were I believe the SSDs do have the advantage but since the XSX is also using a top notch SSD as well, I don't believe we will see these issues on that machine or on decent PC SSDs either.

I don’t know if devs are really that much better of a source.  Everybody has an agenda and a lot of devs have more reason to have an agenda than most.  They actually have money at stake.  

Personally, I don’t expect a noticeable difference between the two.  Just like this gen when there was a much bigger gap, the differences are minor at best and if you weren’t running the versions side by side and pausing and zooming in, you would have a hard time telling them apart.

Next gen isn’t going to come down to the specs.  It’s going to come down to the games.  

@ bolded: Both mean the same thing.

@ the rest: If you drive your car at its speed limit of 200mph and I speed past you with mine at 400mph (twice more), would you agree I smoked you? Or would you say your car is comparable to mine because I'm not topping at 2000mph (10x more)?

He was fighting before entering the portal and after. I don't really see a reason for him to be fightining inside the portal (since it the jump takes seconds) but sure it could happen, but the fact that it didn't doesn't prove it is scripted.

You want to count it twice? It have RAM advantage and bandwidth? The RAM ammount is the same, while PS5 have a single speed and XSX on the 10Gb have a little faster but on the 6Gb (that won`t be all for OS) is slowe. The difference in the 10GB speed is close to the difference in GPU so it is basically a match to keep it feed.

You are assuming one or the other throttle. You didn`t really understood Cerny explanation. The speed on the GPU and CPU can be sustained for as long as is necessary, that is it. And if because of load to keep the thermal level they can achieve over 10% saving in power with only 2% decrease in the clock.

Actually SSD does that. When it stream better quality assets (including texture) it helps to make better quality pixels, it doesn`t help on the computational capability thought. By having twice the speed it can stream much larger textures (higher quality).

Like hyna said, they are both refering to the same thing. Keep in mind, neither sony or ms are doing much in the way of ray tracing, they are both buying AMD's solution so both will use the same hardware. Now on the software side, it could be possible that they both do their own thing, MS already said that they have improvements done with direct x ultimate, from sony we dont know any more.

Now again, with the ssd it definetly could increase quality. Like I said before, If 12gb of ram is available, the inmage does not use all 12gb. they save some ram for data that will be used on the future so as to not load from storage the entire chunk as it would take to long. Thanks too SSD tech they are both using is unknown how much ram needs to be separated, but before it was 50/50. What ever that amount is now, we know at the very least that the ps5 is way faster so less ram needs to be reserved so thats already extra ram the ps5 could use to improbe visuals. Sony is claiming that they dont need to reserve any ram as the ssd is fast enough while ms claims that its not true and they will both still do it but the ps5 will still be faster and would be good enough. From that PR from each alone we can deduce that at the very least the ps5 will have more ram free for visuals. If what sony's statement are true and they dont need to reserve n ram at all and at the same time off load some proceses to be made directly from storage without needing to load to ram first, then the amount of available ram for the ps5 is gona be huge. enough to show some serious diference on top to also remove load times. But again, we have to wait and see.

I am only going with what's stated in the marketing. Xbox claims Hardware Accelerated while Sony claims Hardware-Based. As seen Below.

Maybe Sony has figured out a solution but lets remember that the PS5 is only twice as fast as the XSX, its not 10x faster making it impossible for the PS5 to do things the XSX cannot do. Also games will be made with Ram limitations in mind so expect next gen games to be designed around 8 to 10gigs of Ram. Sure maybe Sony can use more resources however its going to be 1st party techniques and paid exclusives. We all know that when it comes to 1st party games, all platform holders have great looking 1st party games and will make no difference to the end user because 1st party games don't appear on rival platforms making comparisons impossible.

He was fighting before entering the portal and after. I don't really see a reason for him to be fightining inside the portal (since it the jump takes seconds) but sure it could happen, but the fact that it didn't doesn't prove it is scripted.

You want to count it twice? It have RAM advantage and bandwidth? The RAM ammount is the same, while PS5 have a single speed and XSX on the 10Gb have a little faster but on the 6Gb (that won`t be all for OS) is slowe. The difference in the 10GB speed is close to the difference in GPU so it is basically a match to keep it feed.

You are assuming one or the other throttle. You didn`t really understood Cerny explanation. The speed on the GPU and CPU can be sustained for as long as is necessary, that is it. And if because of load to keep the thermal level they can achieve over 10% saving in power with only 2% decrease in the clock.

Actually SSD does that. When it stream better quality assets (including texture) it helps to make better quality pixels, it doesn`t help on the computational capability thought. By having twice the speed it can stream much larger textures (higher quality).

Google: Hardware acceleration makes a big difference. But the real distinction isn't between hardware and software, but between GPU acceleration with and without dedicated RT Cores. You don't need specialized hardware to do ray tracing, but you want it.

Hardware accelerated and hardware based are highly likely to mean the exact same thing in this instance.
Don't hold much credit in marketing teams.

To be fair... It's nothing new.
I was fighting Ultimecia in Final Fantasy 8 just a few days ago and we were warping from place to place during the fight.
That's a Playstation 1 game with 300kb/s of optical disk bandwidth and Ram measured in mere megabytes. (Obviously I was playing it on Switch though.)

There are going to be some memory operations which will show some significant advantages in the faster memory space on the Xbox Series X, but like you alluded to, the Xbox Series X also needs that extra bandwidth due to it's higher levels of processing capabilities.

We don't yet know how much Ram will be reserved for OS/Background duties, hopefully it's the same as 8th gen or even a regression, this new generation will likely end up being memory limited by the time we end it.

Cerny's explanation isn't really elaborating on every single possible scenario though.

The fact is, even when you have a GPU's compute pegged at 100% there are often parts of the GPU (I.E. Fixed function units) which are being underutilized, which is spare TDP, that TDP can then be funneled into the CPU or GPU's clockrate rather than let it go to waste.

For example, there is the very real possibility that not all games will leverage the Playstation 5's Ray Tracing cores, but will still use the GPU to it's fullest extent, like the Unreal Engine 5 demonstration... That's allot of spare compute and energy on the table, so in those instances, we might as well use the energy that would be used for those Ray Tracing cores to bolster CPU and GPU clockrates.

It's a more efficient use of limited resources essentially.

But it does add some variability in the Playstation 5's hardware design and there is the very real possibility that when the hardware is pegged at 100% across the entire system, that clockrates will be reduced by a set amount. - But we will need to wait and see what that amount is.

SmartShift though is essentially a Thermal Dissipating Power rule that the entire console needs to adhere to, so if any component isn't being 100% utilized, energy can be shifted to another area to increase overall performance.

If the Playstation 5 was able to maintain it's clockrates and performance constantly irrespective of TDP or utilization, then Smartshift is a redundant technology, but because it's a front-and-center feature... Well. You get the idea.

The SSD in the Playstation 5 is a sizable advantage... Especially over time.

In 30 seconds worth of streaming the Xbox Series X's storage can transfer a maximum of 72GB of uncompressed data.
In 30 seconds worth of streaming the Playstation 5's storage can transfer a maximum of 165GB of uncompressed data.

That's an advantage of 93GB of extra data that can be shown on-screen in a 30- second block for the Playstation 5, which is a massive amount of data... Streaming data isn't just streaming for a few moments and stopping, it's a constant, especially when you are optimizing for that aspect extensively. (I.E Open world games.)

Obviously other factors will come into play like decompressed data, the types of data, random reads, OS and I/O overheads and more which will skew the results for either hardware platform.

So whilst comparing 2.4GB/s to 5.5GB/s doesn't seem significant, it's actually a really significant number... When you account for it over time.

But then again the 20% extra compute performance the Xbox Series X is also a significant advantage... And that too can be cycled over multiple frames by deferring operations, so that 2 Teraflops worth of compute time can turn into 6 teraflop advantage for instance.

Both consoles have advantages and disadvantages over each other and that will drive competition and innovation for the first party/exclusives to push innovative rendering approaches.

I.E. Halo vs Uncharted from the 7th gen all over again.

Exciting times.

We have basically come full circle in the GPU space.
Originally the best approach was to have all units (Vertex+Pixel+Texture+ROP) units separate, then around the Geforce 8/Radeon HD 2000 series, AMD and nVidia essentially agreed that the best approach was to combine the Vertex+Pixel operations into the same unit to consolidate compute resources.

With the advent of the Radeon 9000 series, AMD essentially rolled TnL into the shader pipelines... nVidia invested resources into maintaining that as a dedicated fixed-function block on the Geforce FX at the expense of shader resources. (A mistake they rectified with the Geforce 6.)

And now we are seeing the bifurcation of processing resources again.

Over time shader resources have become more plentiful and have become more programmable, so I am going to go out on a limp and assert that at some point nVidia and AMD will reach a point where it simply makes sense to roll the RT processing into the shader cores... The shader cores can already do it, it's just don't have the appropriate level of specialization to do it efficiently, not while they are still tasked to handle regular rasterization as well.